Swage It XL650 Pocket Swager on Ebay

[Raydee38]

Has anyone tried one of these yet? I know the "other" brand got horrible reviews but this one looks like a better design. I did rear one review on the AR15 forums but it looks like the guy that did the review was possible the owner of the company. If that is true I will stay away form this one....I hate dishonest people!

[sschultz]

I would try the swage it over the other one. I read the ar15 forum on this I guess I did not pick up on the reviewer being the owner.

[Raydee38]

Yeah the topic I read was closed and being investigated.

[The Donald]

I saw the posting on ARFCOM, sad to hear the owner was not honest. The swage he sells looks like a very good design for the 650. If he was honest he was the owner/designer he would have been more credable. I still think I might buy one to prep both 223 and 9mm. Might need to buy extra shell plates one for loading other for case prep.

[glynnm45]

The swage attachment looks solid and since it attaches to the press instead of a shell plate attachment it should work very well and not violate Dillon's lifetime warranty. Bet he sells a pot load of em, I know I'm down for one.

[Raydee38]

Does it matter if there is no adjustment? I am def looking hard at buying one of these to process 223.

[RDA]

The swage attachment looks solid and since it attaches to the press instead of a shell plate attachment it should work very well and not violate Dillon's lifetime warranty. Bet he sells a pot load of em, I know I'm down for one.

This one will violate Dillon's warranty just like the other one, Dillon has clearly stated that the XL650 was not designed for the stress that swaging imparts on the machine (i.e., the amount of pressure put on the case and therefore the shell plate and the ram when swaging a piece of brass).

[EngineerEli]

Does look decent, my only concern is it still puts all that force upwards onto the shell plate, and retaining bolt, which it is probably not designed for. I really wonder how much more force it takes to swage a primer pocket as compared to seating a primer in a tight primer pocket. Or the difference between seating a large rifle primer (large and hard) compared to swaging a small pistol primer pocket... I guess you could just use some kind of scale and see how much force it takes at the handle and compare it... anyone have that type of scale they could try it on?

[BeerBaron]

I can't immediately think of an easy way to add a load cell of some kind but you could rig up a dial gauge pretty easily and measure any deflection at the shell plate.

[AJE]

I was in the arfcom thread... It was never said the owner was the poster, but it certainly seemed possible (had both products in hand two days after asking for opinions on them).

Anyway, I understand that it will still void the warranty, but the design seems much better to me than the other swage unit.

[glynnm45]

It'd be nice if Dillon would weigh in on this attachment. If you've swaged the primer pocket of many pieces of brass (I swage LC 223 brass a lot), the force to swage doesn't seem to be an excessive amount of pressure. I use the Dillon super swager.

[EngineerEli]

I can't immediately think of an easy way to add a load cell of some kind but you could rig up a dial gauge pretty easily and measure any deflection at the shell plate.

My thought that because the linkage is all the same,the force at the handle of the press should be proportional to the force on the shell plate, so we don't need to know the actual force the shell plate sees, just the force going into the handle. This would allow us to see if the force required for swagging various primer pockets is the same, greater, or less than the force required to seat certain primers. I just don't have that type of load measuring equipment.

Honestly, I am so paranoid about high primers and light strikes, that I push forward pretty darn hard to seat my primers. I would have trouble believing it requires any more force than that to swage a brass primer pocket...

[AJE]

Honestly, I am so paranoid about high primers and light strikes, that I push forward pretty darn hard to seat my primers. I would have trouble believing it requires any more force than that to swage a brass primer pocket...

That's kinda where I am... my arm hurts after a few hundred rounds.

[Kaldor]

Honestly, I am so paranoid about high primers and light strikes, that I push forward pretty darn hard to seat my primers. I would have trouble believing it requires any more force than that to swage a brass primer pocket...

That's kinda where I am... my arm hurts after a few hundred rounds.

Even though its not a 650, I get that on my LnL. Inline Fab ergo handle helped, but after 400-500 I about tapped out because my shoulder is killing me.

[Raydee38]

If the press mounted swager voids the No BS warranty then I am not interested in it. I do have a Super Swage that I use all the time but a press mounted swager would be a time saver.

[RDA]

It'd be nice if Dillon would weigh in on this attachment. If you've swaged the primer pocket of many pieces of brass (I swage LC 223 brass a lot), the force to swage doesn't seem to be an excessive amount of pressure. I use the Dillon super swager.

They have weighed in on swageing using these aftermarket add-on swagers:

http://www.dillonprecision.com/XL_650_swager__warranty_voided-98-11-3064.htm

They have also posted as much on these forums as well.

[dddoo7]

I know you probably know this already, but the 1050 is the best and quickest swager I have seen. There are no extra steps and it is quick and easy to adjust. The 1050 is worth the cost just for the swaging aspect. I have done 1000's of rounds on the super swager and actually got pretty fast at it, but I would not go back.

[jmorris]

My thought that because the linkage is all the same,the force at the handle of the press should be proportional to the force on the shell plate, so we don't need to know the actual force the shell plate sees, just the force going into the handle.

With compound linkages it is going to matter exactly where in the stroke you are, or not really proportional to input force.

The most simple way I can think of would be using a push and pull gauge scale, actually two. Have one that screws into station #2 with and contact the primer anvil that will measure the push force of it while applying force to the handle with the pull scale. This will give you a ratio where you can calculate input/output force at the specific part of the stroke we are talking about.

[glynnm45]

It'd be nice if Dillon would weigh in on this attachment. If you've swaged the primer pocket of many pieces of brass (I swage LC 223 brass a lot), the force to swage doesn't seem to be an excessive amount of pressure. I use the Dillon super swager.

They have weighed in on swageing using these aftermarket add-on swagers:

http://www.dillonprecision.com/XL_650_swager__warranty_voided-98-11-3064.htm

They have also posted as much on these forums as well.

That's in reference to the GS add on swager, not the piece of equipment OP is talking about. That said, since Dillon doesn't make it and doesn't get any money(s) from the product, I know the answer they would provide. Can't really believe the force to swage with this newer add on would be any greater that the force used to seat a primer into a tight primer pocket.

[Pat Miles]

glnnm45,

Why don't you take a minute and dial up the good folks at Dillon, (800)223-4570, and ask your questions. Doing so would give you the answers you want without any speculation. Let us know what you find out.

[RDA]

It'd be nice if Dillon would weigh in on this attachment. If you've swaged the primer pocket of many pieces of brass (I swage LC 223 brass a lot), the force to swage doesn't seem to be an excessive amount of pressure. I use the Dillon super swager.

They have weighed in on swageing using these aftermarket add-on swagers:

http://www.dillonprecision.com/XL_650_swager__warranty_voided-98-11-3064.htm

They have also posted as much on these forums as well.

That's in reference to the GS add on swager, not the piece of equipment OP is talking about.

it doesn't matter, their response would apply either way, both force a rod into the primer pocket at station #2 with the case being held by the shell plate. One version or the other wouldn't apply any more or any less force than the other.

Here is a more generic response by Dillon since you seem hung up on that one being specific to the GS version:

http://www.dillonprecision.com/#/Swaging_556_primer_pockets-98-11-2193.htm

Edited September 30, 2015 by RDA

[glynnm45]

It'd be nice if Dillon would weigh in on this attachment. If you've swaged the primer pocket of many pieces of brass (I swage LC 223 brass a lot), the force to swage doesn't seem to be an excessive amount of pressure. I use the Dillon super swager.

They have weighed in on swageing using these aftermarket add-on swagers:

http://www.dillonprecision.com/XL_650_swager__warranty_voided-98-11-3064.htm

They have also posted as much on these forums as well.

That's in reference to the GS add on swager, not the piece of equipment OP is talking about.

it doesn't matter, their response would apply either way, both force a rod into the primer pocket at station #2 with the case being held by the shell plate. One version or the other wouldn't apply any more or any less force than the other.

Here is a more generic response by Dillon since you seem hung up on that one being specific to the GS version:

http://www.dillonprecision.com/#/Swaging_556_primer_pockets-98-11-2193.htm

Not "hung up" at all, and quite frankly I don't appreciate your condescension. All I'm saying is the force to seat a primer, especially the way Dillon describes the procedure is to " fully" push the handle forward. That being said, the question is how much force would it be to swage a primer pocket? IMO, probably no appreciable difference.

[RDA]

It'd be nice if Dillon would weigh in on this attachment. If you've swaged the primer pocket of many pieces of brass (I swage LC 223 brass a lot), the force to swage doesn't seem to be an excessive amount of pressure. I use the Dillon super swager.

They have weighed in on swageing using these aftermarket add-on swagers:

http://www.dillonprecision.com/XL_650_swager__warranty_voided-98-11-3064.htm

They have also posted as much on these forums as well.

That's in reference to the GS add on swager, not the piece of equipment OP is talking about.

it doesn't matter, their response would apply either way, both force a rod into the primer pocket at station #2 with the case being held by the shell plate. One version or the other wouldn't apply any more or any less force than the other.

Here is a more generic response by Dillon since you seem hung up on that one being specific to the GS version:

http://www.dillonprecision.com/#/Swaging_556_primer_pockets-98-11-2193.htm

Not "hung up" at all, and quite frankly I don't appreciate your condescension. All I'm saying is the force to seat a primer, especially the way Dillon describes the procedure is to " fully" push the handle forward. That being said, the question is how much force would it be to swage a primer pocket? IMO, probably no appreciable difference.

There is no condescension in my response, I was only providing facts rather than speculation as you had done with respect to how Dillon would respond to the warranty issue.

The force to swage versus the force to seat a primer can be debated and I wasn't opining to that aspect.

[glynnm45]

It'd be nice if Dillon would weigh in on this attachment. If you've swaged the primer pocket of many pieces of brass (I swage LC 223 brass a lot), the force to swage doesn't seem to be an excessive amount of pressure. I use the Dillon super swager.

They have weighed in on swageing using these aftermarket add-on swagers:

http://www.dillonprecision.com/XL_650_swager__warranty_voided-98-11-3064.htm

They have also posted as much on these forums as well.

That's in reference to the GS add on swager, not the piece of equipment OP is talking about.

it doesn't matter, their response would apply either way, both force a rod into the primer pocket at station #2 with the case being held by the shell plate. One version or the other wouldn't apply any more or any less force than the other.

Here is a more generic response by Dillon since you seem hung up on that one being specific to the GS version:

http://www.dillonprecision.com/#/Swaging_556_primer_pockets-98-11-2193.htm

Not "hung up" at all, and quite frankly I don't appreciate your condescension. All I'm saying is the force to seat a primer, especially the way Dillon describes the procedure is to " fully" push the handle forward. That being said, the question is how much force would it be to swage a primer pocket? IMO, probably no appreciable difference.

There is no condescension in my response, I was only providing facts rather than speculation as you had done with respect to how Dillon would respond to the warranty issue.

The force to swage versus the force to seat a primer can be debated and I wasn't opining to that aspect.

Here's your statement that seemed condescending to me: Here is a more generic response by Dillon since you seem hung up on that one being specific to the GS version

I don't know you from the next guy, but I bet you wouldn't of liked my response if you'd said that to my face. The rest of your information is Dillon boilerplate pablum.

Maybe I should have described your remark as "smarmy".

[RDA]

Here's your statement that seemed condescending to me: Here is a more generic response by Dillon since you seem hung up on that one being specific to the GS version

I don't know you from the next guy, but I bet you wouldn't of liked my response if you'd said that to my face. The rest of your information is Dillon boilerplate pablum.

Maybe I should have described your remark as "smarmy".

Awfully defensive? Good luck with your SwageIt.